Methods for determining specific movements of a body that use a variety of devices, apparatus and systems are, generally speaking, known. The term “body” is defined broadly hereafter and includes both organic and inorganic objects.
In point of fact, many methods are known for sensing body activity, including both movement and non-movement (i.e., sensed dynamic accelerations, including cessation of movement), as well as, for sensing body movement over time, which is commonly used to determine comparative levels of activity of a monitored body (See, U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,110,741, 4,292,630, 5,045,839, and 5,523,742). These methodologies, however, merely report various levels of body activity, and, simply stated, fail to recognize possible causes for any increased or decreased level of body activity.
In contrast, other methodologies have developed over time for the detection of falls (See also, U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,829,285, 5,477,211, 5,554,975, and 5,751,214). These methodologies are largely based upon the utilization of one or more mechanical switches (e.g., mercury switches) that determine when a body has attained a horizontal position. These methods however fail to discern “normal,” or acceptable, changes in levels of body activity. Stated another way, the foregoing fall detection methodologies provide no position change analysis and, therefore, cannot determine whether a change in position, once attained, is acceptable or unacceptable.
For instance, in veterinary applications, it is well known that horses sleep while standing and that their breathing is less effectively if they are lying down, particularly if on a side. If a high value mare in foal lies down for a period of time (i.e., is inactive), there is an appreciable economic risk. Contemporary systems and methodologies do not provide activity monitors that “warn” or “alarm” that the absence of movement within a specific environment is dangerous.
As a further example, if a body under consideration was an extraction pump and the environment were either a sump near a subway station, in addition to monitoring for normal operation, which is very episodic and activated by accumulating water, the pump should be monitored for inactivity over some period of time as indicia that the pump may be malfunctioning and jeopardizing the nearby subway tunnel. Warning of the absence of activity of machinery, depending upon the environment, can have significant safety, economic, and like effect.
Various training methods have been conceived for sensing relative tilt of a body (See, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,300,921 and 5,430,435), and some such methodologies have employed two-axis accelerometers. The output of these devices, however, have reported only static acceleration of the body (i.e., the position of a body relative to earth within broad limits). It should be appreciated that static acceleration, or gravity, is not the same as a lack of dynamic acceleration (i.e., vibration, body movement, and the like), but is instead a gauge of position. While accelerometers that measure both static and dynamic acceleration are known, their primary use has heretofore been substantially confined to applications directed to measuring one or the other, but not both. For instance, the absence of activity/movement for a period of time for a snowmobile or other all-terrain vehicle in the field may signal an equipment breakdown placing the safety of the user at risk.
It may be seen that the various conventional detectors fall into one of two varieties, those that gauge movement of the body and those that gauge a body's position by various means, with neither type capable of analyzing body activity to determine whether the same is normal or abnormal; and if abnormal, whether such activity (including inactivity) is so abnormal to be beyond tolerance, for instance, to be damaging, destructive, crippling, harmful, injurious, or otherwise alarming or, possibly, distressing to the body.
None of the methodologies heretofore known have provided a suitable means to evaluate body activity over time and to determine whether such activity is tolerable. Further improvement could thus be utilized.